Talk:Succor
It's name says it all. Succor Suxxorz :Hah. 82.17.103.240 12:08, 4 March 2007 (CST) ::Actually, it has a lot of uses - two Dervishes can cast it on each other to count as an enchantment (for armor bonus, Mystic Regeneration, or countless other skills that get more powerful with the number of enchantments they have on them.) 64.105.36.31 21:42, 4 March 2007 (CST) Removed this from page: * As of 3/3/2007 heroes will cancel enchantments which require maintenance immediately after casting them. So attempting to use this spell by a hero monk results in wasted energy and a wasted skill slot. Yes, heroes do auto-cancel maintained enchantments, unless you shift-click their skill (to disable it) then manually casting it by clicking on the target then clicking on the skill on their skill bar. There is no need for this note here, nor any other skill page, as it is addressed on the Hero page. Queen Schmuck 00:17, 5 March 2007 (CST) :Haven't tested it yet, but does this skill stack ?, i mean if 2 people cast it on me ? do i get +2 regen of both skills ? or does the 2e cast remove the skill from caster 1 ? Else my idea is kinda out of the question that i had in mind... :P--OMEGA-ThundeR 03:50, 8 March 2007 (CST) ::The target will have one extra regen but both casters will be maintaining it. If it gets hit by enchant removal, both copies will get removed by a single removal. The general rule is an enchanted character will never benefit from multiple copies of an enchantment, though multiple people can put essence on the same person to benefit or for non-maintained enchantments, it can help to extend durations. --Fyren 03:58, 8 March 2007 (CST) ::: Not really the answer i was looking for. Lets say ur in a party of 3, i am person 1 and the other 2 have succor. they both cast it on me. do I get an extra +2 health and energy regen ? or do i get only +1 regen because the skill won't stack ?--OMEGA-ThundeR 04:03, 8 March 2007 (CST) :::: Just to make sure what I was thinking was correct, I tested this in PvE. Three characters (Dunkoro, Tahlkora, and myself) had enough maintained enchantments going so that we were at 0 energy regeneration. I then used blessed signet to get back to full energy on all three characters. Each of the three characters had Succor cast on Master of Whispers (MoW), which gave MoW +1 energy and +1 hp extra regeneration, for a total of +1 hp and +5 energy (+4 energy regen normally). MoW did not get any extra benefits from having 3 copies of the enchantment cast on him. When MoW cast a single spell, all three characters maintaining Succor lost 1 energy (the energy loss affected all that maintained Succor). ::::The end result is that having more than one character cast Succor on a single target is a complete waste of energy. But, if each character cast Succor on a different target (Joe casts on Jill, Jill casts on Jane, Jane casts on Mike, Mike casts on Joe), the entire group would get +1 hp regeneration, with the side effect of a character losing 1 energy anytime their Succor target cast a spell. While this would work great on a group of warriors and rangers casting on themselves (since they rarely if ever cast spells), this would usually work terribly on any other classes, as the energy lost would not be worth +1 hp regen. ::::*usually - if a warrior was pure adrenaline based, energy would be of no use anyway, so that character could give Succor to up to 2 other targets ::::Succor will not end on the target until all maintainers remove it. I am 99.99% sure that one "remove enchantment" would completely remove Succor from MoW (as it is just one enchantment, only cast multiple times). ::::Queen Schmuck 18:36, 8 March 2007 (CST) ::::I did answer the question in my first sentence. The rest was an explanation. --Fyren 19:57, 8 March 2007 (CST) Note This note sucks: "If two or more players cast Succor on each other, it will cancel out the upkeep cost and offer free health regeneration. Useful with warriors as they can use non-spell skills." I REALLY don't think we should encourage 2 wammos in a group to give up skill slots for 1 regen... Tain 00:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC) :Yea, mending is so much better =o... 75.186.77.107 06:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC) ::Haha, I put that there sooo long ago, pwns mending tho, no investment.--Relyk 01:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC) :::Better than mending doesn't mean much ;) +1 regen isn't worth the skill slot, even if it's free. Tain 02:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC) ::::BUT you could have +6 regen with only two pips!-- 03:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC) Related skills Hi, I cleared out the Related Skills section because it seemed very tenuous. Blood Ritual and BiP offer tons more E-gen, no health regen, are not maintained, and need a health sacrifice. Well of Power is a pulsing AoE corpse exploitation spell and is not maintained. Song of Power ends on skill use, does not offer health regeneration, is not maintained, and is not a spell. None of them cause any effect to the caster whatsoever when the beneficiary of the enchantment uses a spell. It seems a stretch to say Succor should suggest those other dedicated energy skills solely because it offers one pip of E-gen. I'm also skeptical about Mending and Watchful Spirit, but they're at least also maintained health regeneration spells. Maybe Well of Power could go back since it does offer both health regen and E-gen. As always of course, feel free to argue. x] -- AudreyChandler 05:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC) :The official definition for what should go in "Related Skills" is things that have a similar purpose, could replace the skill in question, or are often substituted for it. Of course, there are always disagreements over this and I stopped caring about it too much because it's not a very important section usually (see: Fireball and Smoldering Embers). In this case, I'd say that none of those skills are related to Succor, since it really is something of a unique skill. The closest relative it ever had was the old Peace and Harmony... Succor is used to "give away" free energy regen. None of the other skills listed act like that. "The Power Is Yours!" is perhaps the closest now, but it's really not very similar. (T/ ) 06:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC) ::Wow, yeah, okay. You said what I was thinking a lot better than I even thought it. lol. That was the basic feeling I had: none of the skills were substitutes really. I tend to think of Related Skills like something a DVD rental site would suggest while you're browsing: "If you loved Succor, you might also like ... !" Although overall, I do agree that it's not a very important section on any skill's page. Mostly, I just feel bad when I scour away someone else's ideas and so endeavor to explain myself somewhere. x] And thanks, the official definition is a good rule of thumb to work by in the future. -- AudreyChandler 06:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)